Preshading: What's it for?

[rivercat]

What is "preshading" supposed to simulate?

Washes & drybrushing simulate depth and wear. What about preshading?

I cant figure out why panel lines would look darker outside the line.

I thought I heard somewhere that a panel's paint would "oxidize" (or something) near panel edges.

Is it just for modern jets or all eras?

Edited December 7, 2009 by rivercat

[TXCajun]

The way I understand it, preshading is a method to trick the eye into seeing "depth" to the subject's paint scheme, resulting in a finish that looks less "toy-like".

Now, my take on it:

I have used preshading on the past three models I have completed. When done with a subtle hand, it can give a nice effect. Some modelers pre-shade the panel lines and recesses/creases with a relatively fine line so that only those areas are shaded. Others choose to shade more "sloppily" so that the shading effect is more random.

However, I got to talking to a fellow modeler on this subject and what I surmised is that while the pre-shading effect is designed to simulate paint fading on the panels, the reality is that most paints "matched" to standard colors are factory pure colors, not colors that have faded in the sun. So, if you apply a pre-shade, then the panel lines would actually be DARKER than factory new colors. Also, in the process of researching this, I learned about scale effect, which means that the smaller the model relative to the actual aircraft, the lighter the respective colors should be relative to the factory pure colors (hope that makes sense).

So, for my next paint job, here's what I'm going to try:

After a white primer, I will pre-shade with the pure base color, or a slightly darkened version of it using a few drops of black. Once that is dry, then mix the pure base color with a bit of light gray or white, and then spray the model with light misting coats so that the panel shading is barely visible. Then, lighten it up a bit more, and spray random blotches on high points. Finally, a fine mist of clear mixed with a couple of drops of light gray sprayed only from the top, then a pure clear coat (probably Future) before decals. Once decals are on, then I'll do a pinwash of very dark versions of the base colors.

I'm not saying that this is the right way to do it, but it's the next step in my journey through this hobby. In the end, what you are trying to do is fool the eye into thinking it is seeing a miniature version of the real thing vs. a toy.

Having said all that, if your choice (or anyone else's) is to build and paint a model as though it is factory fresh, then of course there is no harm in that. I support wholeheartedly folks doing whatever they feel brings them fun in this hobby.

Stew

Edited December 7, 2009 by CenTexModeler

[toadwbg]

IMHO- pre-shading is another technique to add some contrast and variation to what otherwise might be a very "ordinary" paint job. I like doing a little bit here and there just for the fun of it.

[BOC262]

Spend some time looking at historical photos of airplanes and then tell me that 99% of the models appearing on the web aren't ridiculously over pre-shaded.

As for preshading being "artistic", look at the work of any reputable aviation artist and see if his "artistic interpretation" bears any resemblance to most models posted on the web.

IMHO, too many modelers get so wrapped up in the technique of applying preshading they totally lose sight of reality.

I see so many models on the web that are beautifully constructed, tricked out with all the bells and whistles of detailing, and then are completely ruined by over done preshading and weathering. Instead of appearing more realistic, they scream "MODEL" at me. Some call this the "IPMS style" or the "Spanish School". I call it sadly misguided.

Modeling techniques go in and out of fashion. There was a time back in the '80s when it was popular to run a technical ink pen along all the panels lines for emphasis--it was visually impressive but bore no relation to reality. Another example--remember back in the '90s when it was popular to "countershade" panels? A visually and technically impressive technique, but in the hands of most modelers it was applied so heavily and regularly it created an optical illusion making the aircraft appear to be upholstered. These and other techniques were wildly popular at one time, but today are rarely used. I for one can't wait for the day when preshading is also thrown into the dustbin of fashion.

[Edgar]

The man who (I think) started all this (and I still have his article, somewhere) actually advocated the use of gloss varnish, before the colour, reasoning that it gave a slightly different texture to the area, which created an impression of "highs and lows," but without smacking you between the eyes. This has been taken further, in fact, in some cases, to almost ludicrous lengths, so, as a friend of mine put it, the model looks like a patchwork quilt.

At a recent show, I questioned a modeller, about a Spitfire, on which he'd pre-shaded every panel line, and every rib in the fabric-covered control surfaces. "It's to show the dirt caught in the joints, and oozing up from the inside." When I pointed out that the stitching had tape doped over it, followed by, at least, 7 more coats, and that a Spitfire's panels were overlapped, not butt-jointed, so not much would get through, he just shrugged, and said, "Well, I like it."

And that's the crux of the whole thing; if you like the effect, and want to do it, it's your model, and yours to do as you wish.

Edgar

[pookie]

Pre-shading is only applicable to a few parts of an aircraft, and not all aircraft. The problem with pre-shading is that modelers use it all over the model. It is very good at simulating depth, when needed. The best way to weather a model is to have pictures of the real thing. Don't cover the model from top to bottom in pre-shading and expect it to look real.

[Charlie Cheetah]

Yeah, I came to that conclusion a few weeks ago, I seriously think the oreshading on my 1/32 Hornet is too much, or maybe is the MM pimer I used being too dark. In any event, my Lt Ghost Grey came out way too dark, I only realized this after putiing on the hard to get Leading Edge standard Hornet decals.

[dragonfly]

Preshading can be effective if done correctly. Subtle is the rule. Less is more. All the cliche's.

I believe this is what modelers are going after using preshading and panel line washes. Chech your references. Planes do get dirty....some more than others.

Jerry

[JasonB]

I think pre shading should be used in the same fashion that figure painters paint their figures. They can't just paint the face a flesh color and let the molded in crevices provide the shading, because they are dealing with a scale figure but a full scale light source, so the figure would look monotone and washed out. So its necessary to add artificial shadows and highlights to make the figures face look more 3-D. I think pre and post shading on a kit should achieve the same thing. It should replicate some of the color and textural variance that is present on the real thing, but lacking in a scale model. It should be subtle, not overly noticable. Unfortunately, there are many tastes when it some to this. In figure painting, you will see a thousand different ways to apply shadows and highlights, some subtle, but others make the figure look like a Vegas prostitute on a Saturday night. Same thing goes for panel line shading. Well, except for the Vegas hooker part.

Another technique which I have used for a long time, but just seems to be catching on, is graduating the color from top to bottom. Its basically adding artificial shadows by lightening the paint at the top of the model, and darkening it below. Like pre and post shading, this is meant to compensate for a light source that is full scale and tends to light the underside of a model more than you see on the full size plane. It looks right to the eye, but it calls for varying the color and not just applying the correct FS number, which I am sure many would be reluctant to do. There is some necessity for these types of artisitic techniques. Just painting the model one monotone color and saying "thats how the real thing is painted" really doesn't look right either. But over doing any of them will just look bad. Moderation is the key.Just like with Vegas hookers!

[geedubelyer]

What is "preshading" supposed to simulate?

Hi rivercat and welcome aboard.

This is a very good question and I think there would be a different answer from any modeller you asked. There are those who like the way it looks just as there are those who don't.

Here's my angle on the job.

It's my belief that we can thank our armour building cousins for this technique. As Stew pointed out, I seem to recall that preshade was introduced to break up large, flat, un-interesting expanses of solid colour. By using a pre-shade technique, variations in hue were introduced adding to the visual interest of an otherwise solid colour.

Like many techniques, pre-shading can be used in other genres. It has become popular in aircraft modelling and used in conjunction with panel line washes and post-shading adds to the aircraft modellers armoury of techniques.

There are occasions on full sized aircraft where a paint finish might resemble pre-shading (I can think of Russian Su-27s or USAF A-10s as two examples) but generally, the technique is more often applied for an artistic effect rather than realism.

It can easily be overdone and as Jerry says, less is more.....

If you like the look that pre-shading gives, build your models that way and enjoy the outcome. If you are aiming for realism, perhaps a more selective approach as suggested by pookie could give more pleasing results.

If you look at many of the builds here on ARC or other modelling forums you will see a great many styles of pre-shading.

Remember, you don't have to use just black. Using darker shades of your final top-coat or even completely different colours can give some unusual and interesting results. Ultimately, the model is yours and unless you are building a commision, you are the one who should enjoy looking at the finished item.

As a final thought, perhaps filters will be the next big thing in aviation modelling. The armour guys are already using them so watch this space.........

Good to have you on board rivercat, enjoy your stay.

[Hawkeye's Hobbies]

It is a waste of time if the modeler doesn't understand the steps and techniques and use them to make it do what it is suppose to do. Many just end up losing the subtle details by applying too many steps and or coats of paint.

[datahiker]

What ^ they ^ said.

Preshading seems like the big fad right now. There are a couple of fairly current posts in the other forums that are also on that topic. It's difficult to do correctly and it's a matter of art vs. realism.

I've made multiple attempts on my latest project then decided I didn't like it and started over. I'll stick with postshading washes for now to get those pesky panel lines looking right, and try again on my next project.

[rivercat]

dragonfly's picture (above) illustrates that preshading's "effect" does exist in 1:1 reality, at least for some subjects. (I assume the museum didn't artificially shade the panel lines.)

But does anyone know why a panel-line would show darkness "outside the line"? The surface is flat, so an illusion of depth doesnt count.

[JasonB]

One possibility is that dirt,oil grease,etc.. collects in panel lines. When water gets into the lines, the dirt flows outward in in the water, leaving what is basically a dirty water stain. I have done the same thing by mistake doing a wash and not wiping it or wisking it away with a brush. It left water stains around the panel lines. That, or someone had a lot of touch up painting to do, and it was all on panel lines.

[PhantomPhixer74]

*

Edited September 22, 2010 by PhantomPhixer74

[richter111]

Welcome!

here is an interesting link.

http://www.hyperscale.com/2009/features/re...aintingrm_1.htm

[Aigore]

This is tricky territory really and it all comes down to taste really! There is no right or wrong in modelleing...only models on the shelve!

And after having said that, I like and use all kinds of paint techinques and there are many good answers in this thread on the subject of preshading.

I frequently use preshading or I can do without...it´s entirely based on what I want to achieve with THIS model

Sure some ppl can go a bit overboard with weathering and preshading...or postshading for that matter, but they aren´t building the model to make anybody else satisfied with it than them selfs!

Some ppl like preshading and some are vehemently against... guess it´s the same with art, some ppl like cubism...I don´t

I´m in the school of "whatever works" and mix, pre- and post shading freely to try to get the model I want, many ppl seems to think you have to choose one or the other technique. I think they work well together.

Cheers!

[The Mikester]

dragonfly's picture (above) illustrates that preshading's "effect" does exist in 1:1 reality, at least for some subjects. (I assume the museum didn't artificially shade the panel lines.)

But does anyone know why a panel-line would show darkness "outside the line"? The surface is flat, so an illusion of depth doesnt count.

Ahhh, there's the rub. In actuality the surafce is not flat. You're talking about aluminum panels affixed to a frame. Stress causes the panels to buckle and change shape. This is one of things that I think pre-shading is trying to simulate as well, the illusion of depth.

Here is where you're using an artistic effect to trick the eye and make look more like the real thing, but like any other effect it can be over done.

[mlicari]

That's a great pic that Dragonfly posted, and shows pretty clearly the effect that preshading is trying to achieve.

But notice how random and faint everything is in the picture. I feel that most modelers that employ preshading really over-do it.

One thing I've tried and like is to not pre-shade, but rather randomly hit patches/panels with a diluted, lightened version of the base color. I lightened some Olive Drab, then mixed it with mostly flat clear and sprayed that over the OD. I found it reduced the monotony of the paint job (OD and Neutral Gray) without really drawing your eye to specific areas of the model. The last thing I wanted was someone to say "wow! look at those panel lines!"

Mike

[BOC262]

dragonfly's picture (above) illustrates that preshading's "effect" does exist in 1:1 reality, at least for some subjects. (I assume the museum didn't artificially shade the panel lines.)

Yes, of course the effect does exist on real airplanes, but seldom--if ever--to the degree of intensity, uniformity and overall coverage often seen on models.

Heavy handed preshading, panel line emphasis and other weathering techniques applied with the subtlety of a sledgehammer make a model look like a caricature. Sure, it's a hobby and people should do what pleases them, but I do find it amusing when so many modelers are striving to produce "realism", but then trowel on ridiculous levels of preshading.

I remember a thread on a modeling website a while back where a guy posted some pictures of his recently completed airplane model and asked if the preshading was too overdone. From the way he worded his question, I suspect he thought it was overdone. Personally, I thought it was grossly overdone. It was so heavy I had a hard time understanding the disconnect between his model and reality. I began to doubt my own knowledge on the subject, so I cracked open a bunch of books and did a lot of websurfing, trying in vain to find a historical example that looked like his model. I found no photos of real airplanes even remotely resembling the preshading on his model--and his model was typical of many models I see online all the time. What really amazed me was the number of guys responding to the thread saying the model didn't have ENOUGH pre-shading, and that next time he should make it even darker! IMHO, the power of fad, fashion and crowd mentality has blinded people to reality.

Edited December 9, 2009 by BOC262

[Greenghost]

It is a waste of time if the modeler doesn't understand the steps and techniques and use them to make it do what it is suppose to do. Many just end up losing the subtle details by applying too many steps and or coats of paint.

Agree, however as many techniques in th hobby you can't master it unless you try it. So don't get initimidate it by the technique, give it a try and have fun.

As others said less is more remember that you can always add more paint or post shading but wil be difficult to remove the overdone effect.

S.

[cksh]

I say give it a try. Personally, I think it add's a bit of life to the model, regardless of how it would look in the real world. Gives it a bit of depth

It is all personal preference so try it and see if you like it. You are your own best critic.

I have been trying post shading panel lines and really like it, but I need more practice as my hand tends to shake.

[The Mikester]

I for one can't wait for the day when preshading is also thrown into the dustbin of fashion.

Why? From my perspective if someone finds a technique realistic and/or artistically pleasing more power to them. I would hope they're building for themselves and not someone else's interpretation of what looks realistic or doesn't.

[MikeC]

That's a great pic that Dragonfly posted, and shows pretty clearly the effect that preshading is trying to achieve.

But notice how random and faint everything is in the picture. I feel that most modelers that employ preshading really over-do it.

One thing I've tried and like is to not pre-shade, but rather randomly hit patches/panels with a diluted, lightened version of the base color. I lightened some Olive Drab, then mixed it with mostly flat clear and sprayed that over the OD. I found it reduced the monotony of the paint job (OD and Neutral Gray) without really drawing your eye to specific areas of the model. The last thing I wanted was someone to say "wow! look at those panel lines!"

Mike

Agree with that - "post-shading" is what I've heard it called.

Whether I preshade, post-shade or do neither or both depends on the model, period, and stage in its life - on a hard-used WWII bird maintained in field conditions yes, for the squadron boss's ship in peacetime less so.

As someone called Al said, "Build what you want in the way you want to".

[CorsairMan]

Its amazing how people get worked up over this subject.